DETAILED ACTION
The present application and its arguments have been reviewed and currently claims 1-20 are rejected.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/25/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicants arguments regarding the drawings, the examiner respectfully disagrees as the cross-hatching of the first and second tube is not correct (ex., both “tubes” appear as solid cylindrical rods that does not comprise a lumen/bore therethrough; ex., there would not be any fluid sealing as stated in paragraph 0003 because the “tubes” are not fluid-carrying conduits).
Applicant’s remaining arguments regarding claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 6/16/2026. These drawings are accepted; however, the cross-hatching does not depict two conduits that comprise a fluid passage (ex., the replacement drawings depict solid rods as opposed to fluid carrying conduits that comprise a passage; ex., see fig. 3a which shows passage 340 which the conduit end is placed). Therefore, the drawings are further objected to as outlined below.
The drawings are objected to because:
In fig. 1, the first and second tube (100, 200) are improperly cross-hatched (ex., the replacement drawings depict solid rods as opposed to fluid carrying conduits that comprise a passage; ex., see fig. 3a which shows passage 340 which the conduit end is placed).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis (U.S. Patent No. 9,279,527) in view of Ashida et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2020/0116284).
In regards to claim 1, Davis discloses:
A magnetic coupling system (see annotated fig. 7c hereinafter unless otherwise noted), comprising:
a first housing (annotated fig. 7c) adapted to be disposed about an end of a first conduit,
the first housing having an axially-extending annular flange (14:15-19, where the flange can be placed on the conduit or the housing, even though it is not shown),
a first annular magnetic element (annotated fig. 7c) coupled to the first housing and concentric with the annular flange (see annotated fig. 7c),
the first annular magnetic element having a first axial end face (annotated fig. 7c);
a second housing (annotated fig. 7c) adapted to be disposed about an end of a second conduit (annotated fig. 7c),
a second annular magnetic element (annotated fig. 7c) coupled to the second housing and concentric with the annular channel,
the second annular magnetic element having a second axial end face (annotated fig. 7c),
wherein an air gap (annotated fig. 7c) is disposed between the first axial end face of the first annular magnetic element and the second axial end face of the second annular magnetic element when the annular flange is engaged in the annular channel,
wherein the first and second annular magnetic elements do not contact one another (see annotated fig. 7c),
but does not disclose:
the first housing having an axially-extending annular flange.
the first annular magnetic element having a first plurality of magnetic polarities disbursed thereabout;
the second housing having an axially-extending annular channel for engagement with the annular flange,
the second annular magnetic element having a second plurality of magnetic polarities disbursed thereabout.
In regards to the polarities, Ashida discloses a similar device (see fig. 3) comprising a first and second housing (14, 16) each comprising an annular magnet (see 0058:1-5, where magnets can be on both sides but not expressly shown in fig. 3 but is shown in fig. 6),
wherein each annular magnet comprises a plurality of magnetic polarities (see fig. 6) disbursed thereabout provide the benefit of disconnecting the device by rotation (0060).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the annular magnets of David to comprise a plurality of magnetic polarities to provide the benefit of being able to disconnect the device by a rotation of one of the housing because David discloses that where in all magnet embodiments, rotation of the housing will cause magnets to repel each other (21:21-29) and Ashida explicitly discloses that a plurality of magnetic polarities disbursed thereabout provide the benefit of disconnecting the device by rotation (0060).
In regards to the annular flange circumscribing the magnets, Ashida discloses a similar device comprising:
a first embodiment comprising flanges (14, 16) each comprising annular magnets (18a, 18b; see fig. 6, which shows magnets can be on each side; see 0058:1-5, where magnets can be on both sides but not expressly shown in fig. 3),
wherein at least one of the flanges comprises an axially extending projection (24) and the other comprises an axially-extending groove (26) to provide the benefit of positioning and guiding of the couplings (see 0019),
wherein the first and second annular magnets circumscribed by the annular flange (see fig. 3),
a third embodiment (see fig. 5) comprising a similar annular projection (24) and groove (26) that is inscribed by the annular magnets (18a, b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the device of David in view of Ashida such that with the axially extending flange of Davis in view of Ashida engages an axially-extending groove to meet the limitation of the claim because Davis explicitly discloses that the axial-extending flange can be placed on the conduits or housing (14:15-19) and Ashida explicitly discloses that it is known to provide an axially-extending flange to engage an axially-extending annular channel to provide the benefit of positioning and guiding of the couplings (0019).
PNG
media_image1.png
624
914
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2, Davis in view of Ashida further discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claim 1, wherein when the annular flange is engaged in the annular channel (it is inherent that the flange is engaged with the channel as outlined in claim 1),
the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element are magnetically attracted to one another when in a first relative position (ex., see fig. 6 of Ashida), and
the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element are magnetically repelled from one another in a second relative position (ex., see fig. 6 of Ashida).
In regards to claim 8, Davis discloses:
A magnetic coupling system (see annotated fig. 7c above hereinafter unless otherwise noted), comprising:
a first housing (annotated fig. 7c) adapted to be disposed about an end of a first conduit (annotated fig. 7c),
the first housing having an axially-extending annular flange (14:15-19, where the flange can be placed on the conduit or the housing, even though it is not shown);
a first annular magnetic element (annotated fig. 7c) coupled to the first housing;
the first annular magnetic element having a first axial end face (annotated fig. 7c);
a second housing (annotated fig. 7c) adapted to be disposed about an end of a second conduit,
a second annular magnetic element (annotated fig. 7c) coupled to the second housing and having a second axial end face;
wherein an air gap (annotated fig. 7c) is disposed between the first axial end face of the first annular magnetic element and the second axial end face of the second annular magnetic element,
wherein the first and second annular magnetic elements do not contact one another,
but does not disclose:
a first annular magnetic element circumscribed by the annular flange,
the second housing having an axially-extending annular channel for engagement with the annular flange; and
the first annular magnetic element having a first plurality of magnetic polarities disbursed thereabout;
a second annular magnetic element circumscribed by the annular channel
the second annular magnetic element having a second plurality of magnetic polarities disbursed thereabout,
when the annular flange is engaged in the annular channel the airgap is disposed between the end faces.
In regards to the polarities, Ashida discloses a similar device (see fig. 3) comprising a first and second housing (14, 16) each comprising an annular magnet (see 0058:1-5, where magnets can be on both sides but not expressly shown in fig. 3 but is shown in fig. 6),
wherein each annular magnet comprises a plurality of magnetic polarities (see fig. 6) disbursed thereabout provide the benefit of disconnecting the device by rotation (0060).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the annular magnets of David to comprise a plurality of magnetic polarities to provide the benefit of being able to disconnect the device by a rotation of one of the housing because David discloses that where in all magnet embodiments, rotation of the housing will cause magnets to repel each other (21:21-29) and Ashida explicitly discloses that a plurality of magnetic polarities disbursed thereabout provide the benefit of disconnecting the device by rotation (0060).
In regards to the annular flange circumscribing the magnets, Ashida discloses a similar device comprising:
a first embodiment comprising flanges (14, 16) each comprising annular magnets (18a, 18b; see fig. 6, which shows magnets can be on each side; see 0058:1-5, where magnets can be on both sides but not expressly shown in fig. 3),
wherein at least one of the flanges comprises an axially extending projection (24) and the other comprises an axially-extending groove (26) to provide the benefit of positioning and guiding of the couplings (see 0019),
wherein the first and second annular magnets circumscribed by the annular flange/channel (see fig. 3),
a third embodiment (see fig. 5) comprising a similar annular projection (24) and groove (26) that is inscribed by the annular magnets (18a, b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the device of David in view of Ashida such that with the axially extending flange of Davis in view of Ashida engages an axially-extending groove to meet the limitation of the claim because Davis explicitly discloses that the axial-extending flange can be placed on the conduits or housing (14:15-19) such that there is an airgap between both (see fig. 7c), Ashida explicitly discloses that it is known to provide an axially-extending and circumscribing flange to engage an axially-extending and circumscribing annular channel to provide the benefit of positioning and guiding of the couplings (0019), modifying the position of the annular flange/channel of Davis in view of Ashida to meet the limitation of the claim would not have modified the operation of the device, and it has been held claims which read on the prior art except with regard to the position were held unpatentable because shifting the position of an element would not have modified the operation of the device. See In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) in MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
In regards to claim 9, Davis in view of Ashida further discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claim 8, wherein when the annular flange is engaged in the annular channel,
the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element are magnetically attracted to one another when in a first relative position (ex., see fig. 6 of Ashida), and
the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element are magnetically repelled from one another in a second relative position (ex., see fig. 6 of Ashida).
Claim(s) 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis in view of Ashida as applied to claims 2 and 9 above and in further view of Stutzman (U.S. PGPub No. 2016/0033067).
In regards to claims 3 and 10, Davis in view of Ashida discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claims 2 and 9,
but does not disclose:
a handle coupled to at least one of the first housing and the second housing for aiding movement of at least one of the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element to achieve one of the first relative position and the second relative position.
In regards to a handle, Stutzman discloses a magnetic coupling comprising handles (12, fig. 2) attached to a side of each coupler (see fig. 2) to allow for easier movement of each coupler (0018:19-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify each coupler of Davis in view of Ashida with the provision of a handle to provide the benefit of easier movement of each coupler, as taught by Stutzman (0018:19-20).
Claim(s) 4, 11, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis in view of Ashida as applied to claims 1 and 8 and in further view of Kingsford (U.S. Patent No. 5,997,049).
In regards to claims 4 and 11, Davis in view of Ashida discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claims 1 and 8,
but does not disclose:
a seal disposed within the annular channel for engagement with the annular flange when the annular flange is engaged in the annular channel.
In regards to the seal, Kingsford discloses a similar device comprising an annular projection (24) and groove (40) comprising a seal (46) to provide the benefit of a leak-tight seal (see abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the groove of Davis in view of Ashida with the provision of a seal to provide the benefit of a leak-tight seal, as taught by Kingsford (see abstract).
In regards to claim 15, Davis discloses:
A magnetic coupling system (see annotated fig. 7c above hereinafter unless otherwise noted), comprising:
a first housing (annotated fig. 7c) adapted to be disposed about an end of a first conduit (annotated fig. 7c),
the first housing having an axially-extending annular flange (14:15-19, where the flange can be placed on the conduit or the housing, even though it is not shown);
a first annular magnetic element (annotated fig. 7c) coupled to the first housing,
the first annular magnetic element having a first axial end face (annotated fig. 7c),
a second housing (annotated fig. 7c) adapted to be disposed about an end of a second conduit (annotated fig. 7c),
a second annular magnetic element (annotated fig. 7c) coupled to the second housing,
the second annular magnetic element having a second axial end face (annotated fig. 7c),
wherein an air gap (annotated fig. 7c) is disposed between the first axial end face and the second axial end face,
wherein the first and second annular magnetic elements do not contact one another (annotated fig. 7c),
but does not disclose:
the first annular magnetic element having a first plurality of magnetic polarities disbursed thereabout;
the second annular magnetic element having a second plurality of magnetic polarities disbursed thereabout;
the first annular magnetic element is circumscribed by the annular flange,
the second housing having an axially-extending annular channel for engagement with the annular flange;
the second annular magnetic element is circumscribed by the annular channel,
wherein when the annular flange is engaged in the annular channel the air gap is disposed between the first axial end face and the second axial end face
a seal disposed within the annular channel for engagement with the annular flange when the annular flange is engaged in the annular channel.
In regards to the polarities, Ashida discloses a similar device (see fig. 3) comprising a first and second housing (14, 16) each comprising an annular magnet (see 0058:1-5, where magnets can be on both sides but not expressly shown in fig. 3 but is shown in fig. 6),
wherein each annular magnet comprises a plurality of magnetic polarities (see fig. 6) disbursed thereabout provide the benefit of disconnecting the device by rotation (0060).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the annular magnets of David to comprise a plurality of magnetic polarities to provide the benefit of being able to disconnect the device by a rotation of one of the housing because David discloses that where in all magnet embodiments, rotation of the housing will cause magnets to repel each other (21:21-29) and Ashida explicitly discloses that a plurality of magnetic polarities disbursed thereabout provide the benefit of disconnecting the device by rotation (0060).
In regards to the annular flange circumscribing the magnets, Ashida discloses a similar device comprising:
a first embodiment comprising flanges (14, 16) each comprising annular magnets (18a, 18b; see fig. 6, which shows magnets can be on each side; see 0058:1-5, where magnets can be on both sides but not expressly shown in fig. 3),
wherein at least one of the flanges comprises an axially extending projection (24) and the other comprises an axially-extending groove (26) to provide the benefit of positioning and guiding of the couplings (see 0019),
wherein the first and second annular magnets circumscribed by the annular flange/channel (see fig. 3),
a third embodiment (see fig. 5) comprising a similar annular projection (24) and groove (26) that is inscribed by the annular magnets (18a, b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the device of David in view of Ashida such that with the axially extending flange of Davis in view of Ashida engages an axially-extending groove to meet the limitation of the claim because Davis explicitly discloses that the axial-extending flange can be placed on the conduits or housing (14:15-19) such that there is an airgap between both (see fig. 7c), Ashida explicitly discloses that it is known to provide an axially-extending and circumscribing flange to engage an axially-extending and circumscribing annular channel to provide the benefit of positioning and guiding of the couplings (0019), modifying the position of the annular flange/channel of Davis in view of Ashida to meet the limitation of the claim would not have modified the operation of the device, and it has been held claims which read on the prior art except with regard to the position were held unpatentable because shifting the position of an element would not have modified the operation of the device. See In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) in MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
In regards to the seal, Kingsford discloses a similar device comprising an annular projection (24) and groove (40) comprising a seal (46) to provide the benefit of a leak-tight seal (see abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the groove of Davis in view of Ashida with the provision of a seal to provide the benefit of a leak-tight seal, as taught by Kingsford (see abstract).
In regards to claim 16, Davis in view of Ashida and Kingsford further discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claim 15, wherein when the annular flange is engaged in the annular channel, the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element are magnetically attracted to one another when in a first relative position (ex., see fig. 6 of Ashida), and
the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element are magnetically repelled from one another in a second relative position (ex., see fig. 6 of Ashida).
Claim(s) 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis in view of Ashida as applied to claims 1 and 8 above and in further view of Delattre (FR-1349343).
In regards to claims 5 and 12, Davis in view of Ashida discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claims 1 and 8, wherein the air gap is maintained when the annular flange is engaged in the annular channel,
but does not disclose:
a first non-magnetic material covering the first annular magnetic element; and
a second non-magnetic material covering the second annular magnetic element.
In regards to the non-magnetic covering, Delattre discloses a similar device (see figs. 1-2) comprising magnets (5, 6) each comprising a film (7, 8) to protect the magnets and provides additional sealing (0001, lines 15-17 of the translated document previously provided herein).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify each of the magnets of Davis in view of Ashida with the provision of a plastic film to protect the magnets, as taught by Delattre (0001, lines 15-17).
Claim(s) 6-7 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis in view of Ashida as applied to claims 1 and 8 above and in further view of Fritsch et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,829,987).
In regards to claims 6 and 13, Davis in view of Ashida discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claims 1 and 8, wherein each of the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element comprises arc-shaped regions,
wherein the annular magnet may be segmented in multiple magnets (13:55-59),
but does not explicitly disclose:
wherein each of the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element comprises a plurality of arc-shaped regions,
each of the arc-shaped regions having an inner radial are portion and an outer radial are portion having opposing magnetic polarities,
wherein for adjacent ones of the arc-shaped regions, the opposing magnetic polarities are reversed.
In regards to the plurality of magnets comprising inner and outer polarities, Fritsch discloses a similar magnetic device (see fig. 3) comprising obvious variants (2:45-46, where multiple coding possibilities for magnets) between:
a first magnetic embodiment comprising four magnets comprising opposite polarities comprising polarities that change circumferentially (see fig. 5),
a second magnetic embodiment comprising multiple magnets comprising polarities that change circumferentially (see fig. 6),
a third magnetic embodiment comprising multiple magnets comprising polarities that change radially (see fig. 7, where the polarities change radially).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify annular magnet of Davis in view of Ashida such that the annular magnet is comprised of a plurality of magnets comprising polarities that change radially to meet the limitation of the claim because Davis explicitly discloses that the annular magnet may be segmented in multiple magnets (13:55-59) and Fritsch discloses that there a finite number of identified solutions of coding the polarities of a plurality of magnets such that the polarities of magnets can either change circumferentially or radially (ex., compare fig. 5 and 7). A person of ordinary skill could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success because modifying the annular magnet as a plurality of magnets comprising polarities that change radially is within their technical grasp and would produce no new results.
In regards to claims 7 and 14, Davis in view of Ashida and Fritsch further discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claims 6 and 13, wherein each of the arc-shaped regions spans are not to exceed 180 degrees (ex., see fig. 5 of Fritsch).
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis in view of Ashida and Kingsford as applied to claim 16 above and in further view of Stutzman.
In regards to claim 17, Davis in view of Ashida and Kingsford discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claim 16,
but does not disclose:
a handle coupled to at least one of the first housing and the second housing for aiding movement of at least one of the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element to achieve one of the first relative position and the second relative position.
In regards to a handle, Stutzman discloses a magnetic coupling comprising handles (12, fig. 2) attached to a side of each coupler (see fig. 2) to allow for easier movement of each coupler (0018:19-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify each coupler of Davis in view of Ashida and Kingsford with the provision of a handle to provide the benefit of easier movement of each coupler, as taught by Stutzman (0018:19-20).
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis in view of Ashida and Kingsford as applied to claim 15 above and in further view of Delattre.
In regards to claim 18, Davis in view of Ashida and Kingsford discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claim 15, wherein the air gap is maintained when the annular flange is engaged in the annular channel (ex., see fig. 7c between each magnet),
but does not disclose:
a first non-magnetic material covering the first annular magnetic element; and
a second non-magnetic material covering the second annular magnetic element.
In regards to the non-magnetic covering, Delattre discloses a similar device (see figs. 1-2) comprising magnets (5, 6) each comprising a film (7, 8) to protect the magnets and provides additional sealing (0001, lines 15-17 of the translated document provided herein).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify each of the magnets of Davis in view of Ashida and Kingsford with the provision of a plastic film to protect the magnets, as taught by Delattre (0001, lines 15-17 of the translated document previously provided herein).
Claim(s) 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis in view of Ashida and Kingsford as applied to claim 15 above and in further view of Fritsch.
In regards to claim 19, Davis in view of Ashida and Kingsford discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claim 15, wherein each of the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element comprises arc-shaped regions,
but does not disclose:
wherein each of the first annular magnetic element and the second annular magnetic element comprises a plurality of arc-shaped regions,
each of the arc-shaped regions having an inner radial are portion and an outer radial are portion having opposing magnetic polarities,
wherein for adjacent ones of the arc-shaped regions, the opposing magnetic polarities are reversed.
In regards to the plurality of magnets comprising inner and outer polarities, Fritsch discloses a similar magnetic device (see fig. 3) comprising obvious variants (2:45-46, where multiple coding possibilities for magnets) between:
a first magnetic embodiment comprising four magnets comprising opposite polarities comprising polarities that change circumferentially (see fig. 5),
a second magnetic embodiment comprising multiple magnets comprising polarities that change circumferentially (see fig. 6),
a third magnetic embodiment comprising multiple magnets comprising polarities that change radially (see fig. 7, where the polarities change radially).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify annular magnet of Davis in view of Ashida and Kingsford such that the annular magnet is comprised of a plurality of magnets comprising polarities that change radially to meet the limitation of the claim because Davis explicitly discloses that the annular magnet may be segmented in multiple magnets (13:55-59) and Fritsch discloses that there a finite number of identified solutions of coding the polarities of a plurality of magnets such that the polarities of magnets can either change circumferentially or radially (ex., compare fig. 5 and 7). A person of ordinary skill could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success because modifying the annular magnet as a plurality of magnets comprising polarities that change radially is within their technical grasp and would produce no new results.
In regards to claim 20, Davis in view of Ashida, Kingsford and Fritsch further discloses:
The magnetic coupling system of claim 19, wherein each of the arc-shaped regions spans an are not to exceed 180 degrees (ex., see fig. 5 of Fritsch).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Makoto (JP-H072695) discloses a similar device comprising magnets that purposefully comprise an air gap to provide a hermetic seal between both pipes (4, 7).
Cuirot (GB-2519530) discloses a similar device comprising magnets and a seal that produces an air gap between the magnets.
Davis (U.S. Patent No. 7,607,430) is the same inventor as applied to claims 1-20 above and discloses multiple configurations where the annular flange can engage an annular channel while circumscribing the magnets (see fig. 3c).
Boitnott et al. (U.S. Patent No. 2,726,104) discloses a threaded device comprising an axial protrusion engaging an annular channel comprising a groove via a threaded connection (ex., compared to a magnetic connection as required by the claim).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER TYLER RUFRANO whose telephone number is (571)272-6223. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30AM to 4:30PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Troutman can be reached at (571) 270-3654. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/A.T.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3679
/Matthew Troutman/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights